I'm not going to get dragged into any arguments so won't post after this as everyone is entitled to their point of view. Danny's family are trying to get as many signatures as possible onto the petition so maybe some from here might help..... The text below is a comment from family:

"The two minute summary is that Danny Nightingale is a long serving senior NCO in the British special forces (SAS). Several years ago he was given a pistol as a memento by a covert Iraqi special forces team he helped train, Danny kept it, intending to present it to the SAS warrant officers mess, which has an extensive display of "war trophies". Danny left Iraq suddenly to accompany the body of his best friend back to Britain. His belongings, including the pistol, were packed up by colleagues and shipped back later to his UK barracks. Danny never opened it up. The following year he went to South America to run in a fund raising "jungle super marathon" during which he became very ill and nearly died, his temperature peaked at 111ᴼF and he had a number of fits. He made a full physical recovery but was left with serious memory loss. He was assigned to SAS selection and training duties in the UK for a while. Last year he returned to operational duty. Just before deployment he shared an army house near the SAS barracks with another senior special forces NCO. They went off to Afghanistan, but it turns out Danny's house-mate was having marital problems. The fellow's wife alerted the civilian police that her husband had illicit explosives in the house – they raided the place and found the stuff. None of it was Danny's, but the search also uncovered the "war trophy" pistol that Danny had completely forgotten about. Both men were summoned home immediately and arrested. The police decided not to pursue the case and handed it over to the military authorities. The room-mate confessed and was given two years military custody. Danny felt that he was innocent – yes, he had the pistol and some ammo, but he'd completely forgotten about it – it was still sealed in the box his colleagues had packed up and sent home years before. Nevertheless the army court martialed him and on Nov 6th he was handed a draconian 18 month prison term, dismissal from the service and loss of pension. This for a man who has literally laid his life on the line in the service of his country numerous times"

Anybody thinking of signing the petition on the strength of this summary owes it to themselves to read the facts of the case as accepted by Danny in the link to the courtmartial transcript previously posted, particually in regard to "still sealed in the box" and "some ammo".

Anybody thinking of signing the petition on the strength of this summary owes it to themselves to read the facts of the case as accepted by Danny in the link to the courtmartial transcript previously posted, particually in regard to "still sealed in the box" and "some ammo".

Given that a four-day-old post has been reopened, for ease, here's the link to the 33pp transcript to go alongside the 'two minute summary' posted above.

Well Just read the closing statement from the Judge Advocate, which clearly shows that great leniency has already been shown due to his record, but that possession of an illegal firearm is also rightly considered a serious offence.

JUDGE ADVOCATE: Sergeant Nightingale please stand. Now Sergeant Nightingale, we have listened most carefully to your counsel, Mr Winter, and taken into account the excellent character reference from your Commanding Officer and the medical evidence from Doctor Young.
Let me say from the outset that it is clear to us that you have rendered very great service over the years both to the army and your country, particularly with regard to your current unit and your operational tours. You have an exemplary character so we put out of our minds the one previous service transgression due to its staleness. We accept you have demonstrated genuine remorse and that the offences come about primarily by way of your inaction.
Now turning to the offence; you shared accommodation with another soldier who has already been dealt with for not dissimilar offences. As a result of information your house was searched and you were found to be in possession of a Glock automatic pistol along with a substantial amount of 9mm ammunition as well as armour piercing rounds. These were found in a cupboard under the bed in your home that was no tin any way secure as very often you were away on your duties. We are told and accept that this weapon came to you as a present in Iraq in 2007; that it was shipped back to you in the UK by colleagues. You say you forgot about it whilst it remained in your box in a cage. Whilst we accept that you gave little or no weight to it, we find it difficult to go on to accept it was out of your mind entirely.
In 2009 you were involved in a very serious incident which resulted in serious injury, which we accept affected your memory to some extent. Nevertheless, mainly through your own determination, you had recovered sufficiently so that by October 2010 you were placed back on active service.
Now in May 2010 the box, in which was the pistol, was moved into the mess for its cage and then, along with the ammunition into your home in January 2011. Subsequently you went on operations in mid-2011 and placed the boxed Glock in a cupboard and the ammunition was placed under your bed. We consider that during this move you would have clearly recalled both the pistol and ammunition but no doubt placed it very low on your list of things to sort out due to being so busy.
Now I do not need to tell you that military weapons particularly when combined with suitable ammunition and kept in insecure accommodation has the potential to cause very great harm should they fall into criminal hands.
We have considered the matter of dangerousness under section 219 of The Armed Forces Act 2006 but do not consider you come within this category. However, parliament has decreed that in relation to Charge 1, that a minimum period of 5 years imprisonment is mandatory unless there are exceptional circumstances. In this regard I can tell you that we accept that you received the pistol legitimately and originally planned to deactivate it but never got around to so doing. With regard to the ammunition, we are concerned that a Senior Non-Commissioned Officer of your experience, being a Range and Training Officer thought it right to effectively hoard ammunition. You would have known the rules and there is a clear obligation on those who come into possession of prohibited firearms and ammunition to comply with the law. Indeed we consider you knew full well from both your experience and Standing Orders that such items were never to be held insecurely at your home but rather securely in a lock-up cage at work.
In considering this matter we are assisted by the case of R v. Reeman and R v. Wood [2006] 1 Cr.App.R. as to whether there are exceptional circumstances in your case. We find:
1. That whilst you did not plead guilty at the first opportunity, we accept that your medical condition allows us to give you more than the usual credit for a plea at the court door.
2. You are a man of exemplary character.
3. You were entirely cooperative and genuinely remorseful.
4. You are a highly valued soldier of great practical experience.
5. The gun was not fired.
6. We recognise that but for your particular work you would not be in contact with such weapons and ammunition.

Further, that the familiarity with them had made you lose sight of the essential requirement for their safekeeping. Finally, that but for your work, you would not find yourself in such a position. All these matters allow us to find exceptional circumstances in your case.
Nevertheless, the court would not be doing its duty in relation to protection of the public at large if it did not bear in mind the potential grave consequences of your behaviour. You must understand that these are extremely serious offences that require a custodial sentence of considerable length. We consider that if you had contested this matter you could likely have received a custodial sentence in excess of 3½ years imprisonment. However, in view of your guilty plea, your exemplary character, the circumstances of the offence and all other matters which we take into account, we consider that we can deal with you more leniently. However, these offences are far too serious for a suspended sentence to be appropriate.
We have not dismissed you or reduced you in rank as on the information before us we consider that you may still, with your specialist experience, be of use to the army in the future. We would invite those who will have to consider your future in the army in due course to bear these sentencing remarks in mind.

The evidence makes clear that at some point in 2011, he came back to his accommodation and moved the gun and ammunition (which was in a clear perspex case) before going on operations. The suggestion that he'd forgotten it was there just doesn't wash. In his interview with police, he told them he just hadn't got around to sorting it out.

His mate got 2 years for similar offences, including having a hand grenade. He's done alright in comparison due to his brain injury and exemplary service. If he's not careful, appealing the sentence could see it increased.

From the support message; "None of it was Danny's, but the search also uncovered the "war trophy" pistol..."
From the court transcript; "...you were found to be in possession of a Glock automatic pistol along with a substantial amount of 9mm ammunition as well as armour piercing rounds..."

I got the sentence wrong when i commented a few days ago, shows you should not trust what the family/media publish as accurate. I believed he got an 18 month prison sentence.
"in relation to Charge 1 the court sentences you to 18 months detention. In relation to Charge 2 the court sentences you to 6 months detention; these sentences to run concurrently"
Detention is not prison, from what I read it is not fun but the regiem is considered to fall well short of prison and attracts 1/3 remission.

It is going to be very interesting to see what the Court of Appeal make of the case on thursday .

It is also note worthy that for all the debate and publicity not one media outlet would appear to have gone to the trouble of finding and publishing the actual facts of the case rather than regurgitate the defence/family statements .